DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant's election with traverse of Species B, figures 2A-2H in the reply filed on July 29, 2026 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that the special technical feature is the casing insert. This is not found persuasive because as admitted by the applicant, the casing insert is not present across all species.
The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 16-22, 32, and 33 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Regarding claim 16: The limitation “as the casing is removed from the through-passage region, the connecting elements release the casing insert from the frame structure” appears to be a method step within an apparatus claim. It is suggested that in order to further limit the claim it be amended to indicate something is intended or capable of being used in the particular manner.
Regarding claim 32: It is unclear how “performing the inserting and connection steps according to a specific sequence” further limits the claim. The specific sequence has not been provided and all processes are performed in a particular sequence.
Additional claims rejected under 35 USC 112 but not addressed are rejected as being dependent on a rejected base claim and failing to further remedy the issue(s).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claim(s) 16, 17, 22, and 32 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over De Faveri (EP 2924222).
Referring to claim 16: De Faveri teaches a building wall module system comprising: a frame structure having predefined width, height and depth dimensions, the frame structure including a first strut structure (items 8a and 8C) extending in a first plane and a second strut structure (items 8a and 8c) extending in a second plane that is parallel to the first plane and is at a specified distance therefrom in a direction of the depth dimension, the first and second strut structures forming a free space between the first and second planes, the frame structure having a wall side region, a wall shell region, a through-passage region between the wall side region and the wall shell region, and a guide rail system (item 6) extending above the through-passage region (figure 2); wherein each of the first and second strut structures has on the wall side region, adjacent to the through-passage region, a first lateral closing profile pair (items 8b, 10b), and has on the wall shell region, adjacent to the through-passage region, a second lateral closing profile pair (items 8b, 10b); the guide rail adapted to displace the sliding door between a closed position, in which the sliding door closes the through-passage region and engages against the closing profile pair, and an open position in which the sliding door completely or partially releases the through-passage region and is displaced into the free space in the wall shell region via the passage in the second lateral closing profile pair (figure 5 shows closed, would be obvious that is opens to allow passage); and a casing insert (items 11b, 11c) having a plurality of connecting elements (splines) connecting the casing insert, inserted into the through-passage region, to the frame structure. De Faveri does not teach an upper closing profile pair, adjacent to the through-passage region, connecting the first and second lateral closing profile pairs at right angles, the second lateral closing profile pair and the upper closing profile pair each having a passage adapted to receive a sliding door and wherein the guide rail system has a guide rail arranged in an upper region of the frame structure and extending in parallel with the upper closing profile pair, and as the casing insert is removed from the through-passage region, the connecting elements release the casing insert from the frame structure. However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have additional matching closing pairs on the upper portion in order to provide a complete casing around the opening. Additionally, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill to recognize that De Faveri would have the guide rail system has a guide rail arranged in an upper region of the frame structure and extending in parallel with the upper closing profile pair, and as the casing insert is removed from the through-passage region, the connecting elements release the casing insert from the frame structure since the sliding door is commonly known to have a guide rail system and to recognize that the connecting elements of splines taught by De Faveri would allow for release of the casing inserts.
Referring to claim 17: De Faveri teaches all the limitations of claim 16 as noted above. Additionally, De Faveri teaches the casing insert includes a first casing element (item 11b) adapted to be inserted on the first lateral closing profile pair, a second casing element (item 11c) adapted to be inserted on the second lateral closing profile pair, and a third casing element adapted to be inserted on the upper closing profile pair (figure 5), each of the first, second and third casing elements having at least one of the connecting elements (splines in figure 2).
Regarding claim 22: De Faveri teaches all the limitations of claim 17 as noted above. Additionally, De Faveri teaches the casing insert is a through-passage insert with the first, second and third casing elements together forming a masking frame having an outer surface that surrounds the through-passage region along the closing profile pairs and covers each of the closing profile pairs at least towards the through-passage region, the outer surface of the masking frame being flat (figure 5).
Referring to claim 32: De Faveri teaches all the structural limitations of claim 16 as noted above. Additionally, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to follow the instant steps of providing the frame structure and the casing insert according to claim 16; installing the frame structure in a building; inserting the casing insert into the through-passage region of the frame structure; connecting the casing insert to the frame structure using a plurality of sub-components of the casing insert each having at least one connecting element adapted to connect to an associated sub-component of the frame structure; and performing the inserting and connecting steps according to a specified sequence, since it is well known to install the specific door structure into a framed building in a specific manner that allows for complete installation without interference of components of the next step.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 18-21, and 33 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: the prior art of record does not specifically teach the bolt mechanism from which the casing is attached and the resilient mechanism on the third casing member.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PATRICK J MAESTRI whose telephone number is (571)270-7859. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th 7-3.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Brian Mattei can be reached at 571-270-3238. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/PATRICK J MAESTRI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3635
Prosecution Insights